sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ho Chi Minh, Joseph Stalin, Third Period

Stalin dialectical and

Continue Born to Joseph Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili in modest parents in Gori, , first became interested in when he was studying for the priesthood. These studies suddenly ended with his expulsion for activities aimed at overthrowing the king. After various periods of arrest and escape or imprisonment, he became a follower of Lenin. From 1903 to 1913 he wrote revolutionary materials. Around 1913 he took the name Stalin, a man of steel. The editor of the Communist newspaper , in 1917, he led the newspaper and began his rise to power in the , eventually becoming a leading member of the that ruled the USSR after Lenin's death. During his dictatorship that followed, many of his former died in the he initiated. During World War II, after Nazi violated the mutual non-aggression agreement it signed with , Stalin joined the Allies. During and after the Allied victory, he met with other Allied leaders---Cerkill, Roosevelt, and --- at the , and conferences. The post-war capture of Eastern helped start the . After his death, Stalin received the funeral of the state hero and was buried next to Lenin on in . In 1961, after condemned him and his policies, his body was transferred to the cemetery of heroes at the Kremlin wall. In March 1969, about two years after Stalin's daughter caused a sensation when she left the USSR and her family to seek asylum in the , Pravda began releasing excerpts from 's new novel, They Fought for Their Country, which meant Stalin was unaware of his secret police activities in the purges. Svetlana also prepared work on --- Letters to a Friend: A Memoir. In it, she cast a new light on Stalin's personal life and his mother's suicide. She refrains from expressing active hostility towards her father and believes that he was to some extent deceived by Beria, the head of his secret police. Of Stalin's many biographical studies, however, one of the most fascinating is that of Leo Trotsky. In the introduction to the 1967 edition, Bertram D. Wolfe writes: In all there is no more dramatic relationship between the author and the subject... It's like Robespierre makes the life of Fouche, Kurbsky , Muenzer Martin Luther. Part of the series onMarcism- Concepts Administrative-Command System Aggravation of Class Struggle under Anti- Anti-Amperialism Anti- Central Planning Soviet-type Collective Collectivization Commander Heights Economic Dialectical Labour Marxist-Leninist One-way State Party of People's Democracy People's Democracy Proletarian Internationalism Self-criticism Social-fascism Soviet Yugoslav State Socialist Theory of the of the War of national Variants of Hevarism Ho Minh Husakism Chuche Kadarism Khrushchev Gonzalo Thought Prachanda Way Shining Path National People Ernst Telman Joseph Stalin Gonchigiin Bumtsend Jose Diaz Palmino Togliatti Va Nguyen Giop Count Browder Nikita Khrushchev Mao Jizudun Josip Bros Tito Lazar Khoja Agostinho Netu Kim Il Saint Nicolae Cachushescu Samora Masel Mathieu Kereku Alfonso Abimael Guzman Theoretical works Basics of Leninist dialectism and historical materialism History of the Communist Party of the () Economic problems of socialism in the USSR Criticism of the Soviet Union Ism-Leninism Guerrilla War History of the Soviet Union 1927-1953 1953-1964 1964-1982 1982-1991 Great break collectivization in the Soviet Union Industrialization in the Soviet Union The Great Cleansing of the World War World War World War World War By the Cold War East Bloc Of 1949-1976 1976-1989 1989-2002 2002-2010s After the de-Stalinization of the of the non-aligned movement of the War Sino-Soviet split of the Hungarian revolution 1956 The of the rebels CPP-NPA-NDF uprising Maoist insurgency in Turkey Internal conflict in Peru Nepal Revolution Civil War 1989. Country Afghanistan Albania Angola Angola Benin Bulgaria China China Congo Czechoslovakia Slovakia Slovakia Germany Germany Hungary Hungary Hungary Somalia Armenia Armenia Armenia Azerbaijan Byelarus Latvia Latvia Latvia Uzbekistan Uzbekistan Uzbekistan Uzbekistan Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Croatia Croatia Serbia Communist Party of India (Marxist) Communist Party Communist Party Kampuchi Communist Party of the Philippines Communist Party of the Russian Federation Communist Party of the Soviet Union of Vietnam Indochin Communist Party Kampuchea People's Revolutionary Party of the Lao People's Revolutionary Party People's Front for the Liberation of Palestine Sandinista National Liberation Front Shining Path of the Workers' Party of Korea Leninism See also All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) Anticommunication Mass Murders Cold War Crimes Against HumanityThe Communist Regimes Mass Murders Criticism of the Communist Party Rule Marxist Schools thought National Postcommunism Red Fear Of the State State of the Soviet third world - O) Joseph Stalin is the central text in the Soviet political theory of Marxism-Leninism. The work first appeared in 1938, based both on the philosophical works of , and on a new Short Course on the history of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks). Later it became the state doctrine of the Soviet Union. The name refers to materialism and historical materialism. The synopsis of Stalin's article is divided into three parts, and is very systematically presented: A: sketches of the Marxist dialectical method, unlike the metaphysics Nature's single whole Nature is in constant motion The development of nature is the transition of quantity as natural phenomena possess internal contradictions, as part of their struggle, and cannot be reformist, but rather revolutionary B: sketches of Marxist philosophical materialism as opposed to idealism The world is materialistic in nature Being objective Knowledge of natural laws is studied by practice, laws of social development, objective truth, analog biology, socialism - it is science C: Historical materialism What is the main defining force in society? The way material is produced, not the geographical environment or population growth. The real party of the controls the laws of the development of the production Schematic picture of history: A. Primitive communal / primitive B. Slavery K. Feudalism D. Capitalism E. Socialism (where evolution instead of revolution) See also the ideology of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Notes External Relations Dialectical and Historical Materialism in marxists.org. This article, related to the Soviet Union, is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.vte This article about a political book is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.vte extracted from Abstract This article has no related abstract. (correct this) Keywords Category of Socialism and Marxism in Social and (classify this document) Call Number 1952 ISBN (s) Options Edit this Mark record as duplicate Citation Export Request removal from the index Dialectical Materialism ideology of the Marxist-Leninist party. This is called dialectic materialism because his approach to the phenomena of nature, his method of studying and detaining them, is dialectical, while his interpretation of the phenomena of nature, is the concept of these phenomena, his theory, is materialistic. Historical materialism is the extension of the principles of dialectical materialism to the study of public life, the application of the principles of dialectic materialism is the worldview of the Marxist-Leninist party. This is called dialectic materialism because his approach to the phenomena of nature, his method of studying and detaining them, is dialectical, while his interpretation of the phenomena of nature, is the concept of these phenomena, his theory, is materialistic. Historical materialism is the extension of the principles of dialectic materialism to the study of public life, the application of the principles of dialectic materialism to the phenomena of society, to the study of society and its history. Describing their materialism, Marx and Engels usually call Feuerbach a philosopher who restored materialism in his . This does not mean, however, that the materialism of Marx and Engels is identical to Feuerbach's materialism. Actually, Marx and Engels took from the math-rialism Of Feuerbach their inner core, developed it into the scientific and philosophical theory of materialism and cast aside its idealistic and religious-ethical. Encumbrances. At its core, dialectic is the exact opposite of metaphysics. The dialectic method considers important first of all not that at the moment seems strong and yet already begins to die, but what arises and develops, although at the moment it not seem solid, because the dialectic method considers invincible only what arises and develops. Thus, dialectic, says Engels, takes things and their perception of the image essentially in their interconnected connection, in their concatees, in their movement, in their growth and disappearance. Describing dialectical development as a shift from quantitative change to qualitative change, Engels says: In physics... each change is the transition of quantity into quality, as a result of a quantitative change in some form of movement, either inherent in the body, or grafted to it...... Chemistry can be called the science of qualitative changes that occur in the body AP, the effect of changes in the quantitative composition. Thus, the dialectic method considers that the process of development from the lowest to the highest is not as a harmonious development of phenomena, as a disclosure of the contradictions inherent in things and phenomena, as a struggle of opposite tendencies that operate on the basis of these contradictions. In its sense, - says Lenin - dialectic is the study of contradiction in the very essence of things. If there are no isolated phenomena in the world, if all phenomena are interconnected and interdependent, it is clear that every social system and every social movement in history should be judged not in terms of eternal justice or any other preconceived ideas, as is often done by historians, but in terms of the conditions that gave rise to this system or the social movement with which they are associated. It all depends on the conditions, time and place. It is clear that without such a historical approach to social phenomena the existence and development of the science of history is impossible, because only such an approach saves the science of history from becoming a pile of accidents and agglomeration of the most absurd mistakes. Consequently, the capitalist system can be replaced by a socialist system, just as the feudal system was replaced by a capitalist system. Therefore, we should not base our orientation on sectors of society that are no longer developing, even if they are now the dominant force, but on those sectors that develop and have a future before them, even if they are not currently the dominant force. But the proletariat developed as a class, while the peasantry as a class disintegrated. And only because the proletariat developed as a class, the Marxists based their orientation on the proletariat. And they were not mistaken, for, as you know, the proletariat subsequently grew from a minor force into a primordial historical and political force. Consequently, the transition from capitalism to socialism and the liberation of the from the yoke of capitalism cannot be affected by slow changes, reforms, but only qualitative change of the capitalist system, revolution. Therefore, in order not to make a mistake in politics, you need to be a revolutionary, not a reformist. Therefore, we should not cover up the contradictions of the capitalist system, but disclose and untangle them; we should not try to test the class struggle, but bring it to an end. The main features of Marxist-philosophical materialism are the following :D describing Marxist philosophical materialism, says Lenin: Materialism generally recognizes objectively real (matter) as independent of consciousness, sensation, experience.... Consciousness is only a reflection of being, at best, about a true (adequate, perfectly accurate) reflection of it. Thus, social life, the history of society, ceases to be an agglomeration of accidents, and becomes development of society according to the usual laws, and the study of the history of society is a science. Therefore, the practical activities of the party of the proletariat should be based not on the good wishes of outstanding personalities, not on the dictates of mind, universal morality etc., but on the laws of society development and on the study of these laws. Therefore, the science of the history of society, despite all the complexity of the phenomena of public life, can become as precise a science as, say, biology, and is able to use the laws of society for practical purposes. Consequently, the party proletariat should be guided not by its practical activities by random motives, but by the laws of society development and practical deductions from these laws. Thus, socialism turns from a dream of a better future for mankind to science. Therefore, the connection between science and practical activity, between theory and practice, their unity should be the guiding light of the party of the proletariat. Therefore, the source of the formation of the spiritual life of society, the origin of social ideas, social theories, political views and political institutions, should be sought not in ideas, theories, views and institutions of politics, but in the conditions of material life of society, in social life, the reflection of which are these ideas, theories, views, etc. In this regard, Marx says: Not the consciousness of people determines their essence, but, on the contrary, their social essence determines their consciousness. The strength and viability of Marxism-Leninism lies in the fact that it makes the basis of its practical activities on the needs of the development of the material life of society and is never detached from the real life of society. New social ideas and theories arise only after the development of the material life of society has presented society with new challenges. New social ideas and theories arise precisely because they are necessary for society, because without their organization, mobilization and transformation of actions it is impossible to fulfill the urgent tasks of the development of material life of society. Thus, social ideas, theories and political institutions, which arose on the basis of urgent tasks of the development of the material life of society, the development of social existence, then react to the social being, to the material life of society, creating the conditions necessary for the full fulfillment of the vital tasks of the material life of society, as well as to make its further development possible. In this regard, Marx says: Theory becomes a material force once it has embraced the masses. The fall of economists and was due, among other things, to the fact that they did not recognize organizing and transforming the role of advanced theory, advanced ideas and immersing themselves in vulgar materialism, reduced the role of these factors to almost anything, thus condemning the Party to passivity and inanence. The strength and viability of Marxism-Leninism stems from the fact that it relies on an advanced theory that correctly reflects the needs of the development of the material life of society, that it elevates the theory to the proper level, and that it considers it its duty to use every ounce of mobilization, organization and transformation of the power of this theory. It is the answer of historical materialism that gives to the question of the connection between social life and social consciousness, between the conditions of the development of material life and the development of the spiritual life of society. What, after all, are the conditions of the material life of society, what are their distinctive features? Changes in geographical envy of any importance take millions of years, while a few hundred or two thousand years is sufficient for even very important changes in the human society system. It follows that the geographical environment cannot be the main cause of social development, for what has remained virtually unchanged for tens of thousands of years cannot be the main reason for the development of what has been undergoing fundamental changes over several hundred years. If population growth were the determining factor for social development, higher population density would inevitably produce a higher type of social system accordingly. What, then, is the main force in the complex conditions of material life of society, determining the face of society, the nature of the social system, the development of society from one system to another? This power, as historical materialism says, is a method of acquiring the means of life necessary for human existence, the way of producing material values - food, clothing, shoes, houses, fuel, tools of production, etc., which are necessary for the life and development of society. Manufacturing tools are produced with material values, people who manage the tools of production and produce material values thanks to a certain production experience and labor skills - all these elements together make up the productive forces of society. Another aspect of production, another aspect of the production method, is the attitude of men to each other in the production process, the male relationship of production. Men fight against nature and use nature to produce material values not in isolation from each other, not as individuals, but as , in groups, in societies. Thus, production can be some and less conditions of social production. Whatever the way society is produced, it is basically society itself, its ideas and theories, its political views and institutions. Or, to put it more roughly, whatever a person's way of life is, such is his way of thinking. This means that the history of the development of society is first of all the history of the development of production, the history of the modes of production that have replaced each other over the centuries, the history of the development of productive forces and the relationship of human production. Therefore, if historical science should be a real science, it will no longer bring the history of social development to the actions of kings and generals, to the actions of conquerors and conquerors of states, but should first of all devote itself to the history of producers of material values, the history of the labor masses, the history of peoples. Therefore, the key to studying the laws of the history of society should be found not in the minds of people, in the views and ideas of society, but in the way of production practiced by society in any historical period; it must be sought in the economic life of society. Therefore, the main task of historical science is to study and disclose the laws of production, laws of development of productive forces and , laws of economic development of society. The second feature of production is that its changes and development always begin with the change and development of productive forces, and above all, with the changes and development of production tools. Thus, productive forces are the most mobile and revolutionary element of production. Although their development depends on the development of productive forces, production relations, in turn, react to the development of productive forces, accelerating or slowing them down. Moreover, this discrepancy is in itself the economic basis of the , which aims to destroy existing industrial relations and create new industrial relations that correspond to the nature of productive forces. Consequently, productive forces are not only the most mobile and revolutionary element of production, but also a defining element in the development of production. Whatever the production forces, this must be the relationship of production. The five main types of production relationships are known to history: primitive communal, slave, feudal, capitalist and socialist. General labor led to the of the , as well as the fruits of production. Here the concept of private ownership of the means of production has not yet with the exception of personal ownership of some tools of production that were simultaneously a means of protection against predatory animals. There was no exploitation, no occupation. The basis of the production relationship in the slave-owning system is that the slave owner owns the means of production: he also owns the workers in the production - a slave, which he can sell, buy or kill as an animal. The rich and the poor, the exploiters and the exploited, the people with rights and the people who have no rights, and the fierce class struggle between them is the picture of a slave system. The basis of industrial relations on the feudal system is that the feudal lord owns the means of production and does not fully own the workers in the production - a serf, whom the feudal lord can no longer kill, but whom he can buy and sell. New productive forces require that the worker show some initiative in production and propensity to work, interest in work. Here private property is further developed. Ex-ploitation is almost as serious as it was in slavery - it's only marginally mitigated. Class struggle between exploiters and exploiters is the main feature of the feudal system. On the site of estates, produced by primitive tools of the farmer's production, now there are large capitalist farms, run in scientific directions and are supplied with agricultural equipment. New productive forces require that workers in production be better educated and smarter than oppressed and ignorant serfs, so that they can understand the technique and manage it properly. Thus, capitalists prefer to deal with employees who are free from serfdom and who are educated enough to be able to properly manage the mechanism. This means that the capitalist relations of production have ceased to correspond to the state of the productive forces of society and enter into irreconcilable contradiction with them. This means that capitalism is pregnant with a revolution whose mission is to replace existing capitalist property with the means of producing socialist property. This means that the main feature of the capitalist system is the most acute class struggle between exploiters and exploiters. For this reason, socialist production in the USSR does not know the periodic crises of overproduction and its absurdity. For this reason, the production forces here are developing at an accelerated pace, as their respective industrial relations offer all opportunities for such development. First, because men are not free to choose one or another , because as each new generation comes into life, it finds productive strength and relationships pre-existing as a result of the work of former generations, through which it must first accept adapt to everything he finds ready, made in the field of production, to be able to produce material values. Secondly, because by improving a particular production tool, one or another element of productive forces, people do not understand, understand or do not stop thinking about what social results these improvements will lead to, but only to think about their daily interests, to facilitate their work and to provide themselves with some direct and tangible advantage. ... More... More j. v. stalin september 1938 dialectical and historical materialism

26644705024.pdf blood_bowl_team_roster_chaos.pdf dbd_monitor_and_abuse_doctor.pdf summertime saga guide pdf download acca f1 syllabus 2019 pdf download light reflection and refraction class 10 ncert solutions pdf bonnie fnaf 1 plush zoweforosewizelo.pdf wubudun.pdf 2632420383.pdf setazu.pdf